Dire Mongoose wrote: ...the wizard plays more conservatively and the sorcerer plays more aggressively. I have noticed this. I think wizards are supposed to be more cautious, and sorcerers more free with their spells. It's a good thing.
And when it's time to face the big bad guy? When the wizard knows that this is the last encounter of the day? Man, that is a fun encounter, because he's saved up all kinds of spells.
Sorcerers are usually regular contributors, but the contribution of a wizard is generally quite variable.
BenignFascist wrote:
This is still an advantage over the Sorcerer.
It's an alternative to the Sorcerer's meat shield. And the Sorcerer's meat shield is the better of the two. So, no, it isn't an advantage over the Sorcerer - it's a weakness compared to the Sorcerer.
BenignFascist wrote:
Why would it be every encounter? Are we assuming that every encounter involves enemies dispelling the Wizard's permanent spells?
Every other encounter. And, yes, dispel magic is a common spell used in the majority of encounters involving spell casters.
BenignFascist wrote:
If the Sorcerer can bind a Cuotal before combat then the Wizard can cast Summon Monster a round or two before combat.
The Sorcerer can bind the Cuoatl a week before the combat. In fact, this Sorcerer has a ring of sustenance so that he can do that binding while the rest of the party sleeps. So, let's make things fair. The Wizard can cast his Summon Monster spell a week before combat as well (you haven't given any reason as to why the Wizard should typically know the exact second combat will start). That makes the Summon Monster spell rather useless since it will have expired before combat starts, but if that's what you really want, I'm okay with that.
BenignFascist wrote:
Unfortunately, it's an assumption that utterly skews the discussion, moving it into the realm of 'What's typical for your campaign.'
The party never rests in your campaign?
BenignFascist wrote:
The advantage of actual items/forgeries over illusions is obvious
Sure it is. Likewise, the advantage of illusions over actual items/forgeries is obvious.
BenignFascist wrote:
Once again we see Leadership being desperately used to compensate for the Sorcerer's lack of ability.
Having a killer leadership score is one of the Sorcerer's abilities.
Lyrax wrote: Sorcerers are usually regular contributors, but the contribution of a wizard is generally quite variable. This is true. The Wizard starts the day with great spells, but as the day goes on, his spell choices get weaker and weaker (because he's cast all his choice spells already). The Sorcerer stays pretty consistent the whole day through.
LilithsThrall wrote: Every other encounter. And, yes, dispel magic is a common spell used in the majority of encounters involving spell casters.
In 3.X, sure. In Pathfinder? Heavens, no. Any caster has many better options than having a chance getting rid of one of your spells.
PF Greater Dispel is better than that, but it's not that much better. It's not the suicide/stupid choice normal Dispel Magic is but I still think a caster can find a better option 90% of the time.
Dire Mongoose wrote: LilithsThrall wrote: Every other encounter. And, yes, dispel magic is a common spell used in the majority of encounters involving spell casters.
In 3.X, sure. In Pathfinder? Heavens, no. Any caster has many better options than having a chance getting rid of one of your spells.
PF Greater Dispel is better than that, but it's not that much better. It's not the suicide/stupid choice normal Dispel Magic is but I still think a caster can find a better option 90% of the time. You're going to think Dispel Magic is a weak spell right up til the point where your wizard looks over at Fred the Fighter who is suppossed to be protecting the wizard - only Fred is dominated (or charmed) and is about to slice your wizard's gullet open with a sharp piece of steel.
And that's not even getting into things like Greater Dispel or the feat from the APG which allows a dispelled spell to be turned back on the caster.
And it's an area of effect.
Dispel Magic is a great spell.
LilithsThrall wrote: You're going to think Dispel Magic is a weak spell right up til the point where your wizard looks over at Fred the Fighter who is suppossed to be protecting the wizard - only Fred is dominated (or charmed) and is about to slice your wizard's gullet open with a sharp piece of steel.
1. That's not an offensive use of Dispel Magic against an enemy caster, so it's 100% irrelevant to this discussion.
2. Protection From Evil is still a better option there, because it will always work vs. a half and half chance (or less) of working, assuming you're dealing with higher level caster opponents as is typical.
3. I sure hope you're completely positive whether, for example, you're trying to target Charm Person vs. Charm Monster, and to be fair, you very well might be -- but if not, Dispel Magic looks even worse in that situation.
LilithsThrall wrote: And it's an area of effect.
In 3.X it is. In Pathfinder it's not -- you do not have an area option with normal Dispel Magic, though Greater Dispel can be. Of course, if you pick the area option, you only ever dispel a maximum of one spell on each target within the 20' burst. That's not awful, but there are a lot of 6th level spells I'd rather cast offensively.
Honestly, I think you're still in the 3.X mindset of how good those spells are. They got hit with the nerf bat hard.
LilithsThrall wrote:
The Sorcerer can bind the Cuoatl a week before the combat. In fact, this Sorcerer has a ring of sustenance so that he can do that binding while the rest of the party sleeps. So, let's make things fair.
A few things here, for the sake of rules and all, from the SRD:
Quote:
Rest: To prepare his daily spells, a wizard must first sleep for 8 hours. The wizard does not have to slumber for every minute of the time, but he must refrain from movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period. If his rest is interrupted, each interruption adds 1 hour to the total amount of time he has to rest in order to clear his mind, and he must have at least 1 hour of uninterrupted rest immediately prior to preparing his spells. If the character does not need to sleep for some reason, he still must have 8 hours of restful calm before preparing any spells.
Recent Casting Limit/Rest Interruptions: If a wizard has cast spells recently, the drain on his resources reduces his capacity to prepare new spells. When he prepares spells for the coming day, all the spells he has cast within the last 8 hours count against his daily limit.
And before you cry that it says wizard there.. further on we have:
Quote:
Daily Readying of Spells: Each day, sorcerers and bards must focus their minds on the task of casting their spells. A sorcerer or bard needs 8 hours of rest (just like a wizard), after which she spends 15 minutes concentrating. (A bard must sing, recite, or play an instrument of some kind while concentrating.) During this period, the sorcerer or bard readies her mind to cast her daily allotment of spells. Without such a period to refresh herself, the character does not regain the spell slots she used up the day before.
Recent Casting Limit: Any spells cast within the last 8 hours count against the sorcerer's or bard's daily limit.
So if you're doing this while resting then you're going to burn the slot for both days, and do not have sufficient restful calm to regain spells.
Finally if your DM is not having your constant bindings have their effect on the party, then shame on him.
-James
Dire Mongoose wrote:
Honestly, I think you're still in the 3.X mindset of how good those spells are. They got hit with the nerf bat hard.
Well the one thing that did get improved is that the cap on the bonus for dispels is removed.
That said its also just one roll rather than one for each spell (where you were bound to get a few successes given enough chances).
Furthermore seeing how dispel magic works, you can stack the dice a bit as well. Cast a mage armor spell at a caster level of one higher than the permanency spell, unless the dispel exactly gets the CL of the permanency then it would get the mage armor spell first. If you are that worried about dispels then a few castings (well to be honest a few 1st level pearls of power) will cover you for greater dispel as well.
I believe that there was a MIC item that raised your CL for a 1st level spell that people used for this against area dispels back in 3.5. In PF I think that there's also a trait along these lines if I recall correctly.
So in all honesty, permanency got a whole lot safer in PF. But if dispels are that common in your game world then you might wish to go with some of these options.
In here I did mention something that we didn't cover as much in this thread, pearls of power. The specialist wizard already not far behind the sorcerer in number of spells (even if far ahead in quality) can further this in the lower level spells via pearls of power. First level pearls are incredibly cheap and 2nd level ones are easily crafted. With the xp costs for crafting removed they seem to be a very nice way to hold on to a degree of wealth assuming items are reasonably bought/sold.
-James
james maissen wrote: BenignFacist wrote: So far I see you trying to downplay several key advantages possessed by the Wizard while attempting to make the most of an idealised scenario that favours the Sorcerer. james maissen wrote:
I think that sums up a few threads on this topic.
I agree, he has failed to make any convincing argument to mitigate any of the numerous advantages that wizard has over his sorcerer. While at the same time failing to point any of the real advantages his character has over Bubba, and he does have a few.
james maissen wrote:
As evidenced in this thread, you have a sorcerer trying to take on a face role but failing at it because they cannot invest in enough of the skills.
Yeah, I don't want a party "face" who can't negotiate and never knows what the other side is really up to.
james maissen wrote:
Meanwhile you have a quickly built wizard (no offense) that does almost the same if not a better all around job.
No offense taken. Honestly, I could do a better job building that character, and if I was going to make a 13th Level spell caster, that's probably not what I would make. The real point was to show that a wizard can be just as effective as a face character as a sorcerer, even though the sorcerer has a Charisma advantage. And I think I showed that.
james maissen wrote: LilithsThrall wrote:
The Sorcerer can bind the Cuoatl a week before the combat. In fact, this Sorcerer has a ring of sustenance so that he can do that binding while the rest of the party sleeps. So, let's make things fair.
A few things here, for the sake of rules and all, from the SRD:
Quote:
Rest: To prepare his daily spells, a wizard must first sleep for 8 hours. The wizard does not have to slumber for every minute of the time, but he must refrain from movement, combat, spellcasting, skill use, conversation, or any other fairly demanding physical or mental task during the rest period. If his rest is interrupted, each interruption adds 1 hour to the total amount of time he has to rest in order to clear his mind, and he must have at least 1 hour of uninterrupted rest immediately prior to preparing his spells. If the character does not need to sleep for some reason, he still must have 8 hours of restful calm before preparing any spells.
Recent Casting Limit/Rest Interruptions: If a wizard has cast spells recently, the drain on his resources reduces his capacity to prepare new spells. When he prepares spells for the coming day, all the spells he has cast within the last 8 hours count against his daily limit.
And before you cry that it says wizard there.. further on we have:
Quote:
Daily Readying of Spells: Each day, sorcerers and bards must focus their minds on the task of casting their spells. A sorcerer or bard needs 8 hours of rest (just like a wizard), after which she spends 15 minutes concentrating. (A bard must sing, recite, or play an instrument of some kind while concentrating.) During this period, the sorcerer or bard readies her mind to cast her daily allotment of spells. Without such a period to refresh herself, the character does not regain the spell slots she used up the day before.
Recent Casting Limit: Any spells cast within the last 8 hours count against the sorcerer's or bard's daily limit.
So if you're doing this while resting then... Look back and you'll see that the character has a ring of sustenance.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/magicItems/rings.html
This allows a spellcaster that requires rest to prepare spells to do so after only 2 hours, but this does not allow a spellcaster to prepare spells more than once per day.
LilithsThrall wrote: Lyrax wrote: Sorcerers are usually regular contributors, but the contribution of a wizard is generally quite variable. This is true. The Wizard starts the day with great spells, but as the day goes on, his spell choices get weaker and weaker (because he's cast all his choice spells already). The Sorcerer stays pretty consistent the whole day through. Don't do that. You are smarter, more respectful, and more rational than this.
LilithsThrall wrote:
Intimidate and Diplomacy are largely redundant. Intimidate can be used when the target is about to kill you and can be used to demoralize. Diplomacy has lasting effects. Other than that, they are the same. Note that for every 5 points by which you succeed, the target's attitude improves by a full step. So, having 4 points over you is significant as it almost guarantees a full step improvement in attitude.
Really the +4 Advantage doesn't mean that much because I have a high enough bonus to do just about whatever I want with either skill. Example a hostile NPC with a +3 Cha bonus has a DC of 28. I can Take 10 getting a result of 34, and improve his attitude to Unfriendly. The DC to get an Unfriendly NPC with a +3 Cha bonus to "give dangerous aid" is 33, I can Take 10 again and get a previously hostile NPC to fight on my behalf.
Also Gather Information became part of Diplomacy, so no they aren't largely redundant.
LilithsThrall wrote:
And Disintegrate and Baleful Polymorph (off the staff), but the thing is, I didn't spend an expensive feat slot in order to do it.
You got me there. You have better DC than me with 4 spells.
LilithsThrall wrote:
Don't kid yourself. Your AC still sucks.
For a 13th Level character, yeah it does, so do my HP. I'm well below the average for a CR 12 encounter. Something I would really work on fixing before I actually played.
Yours on the other hand is absolutely suicidal. Every monster remotely near your CR auto hits you with everything, how the hell did you survive to 13th Level. Doesn't your DM ever use anything with missile weapons, fly by attack, targeted spells, or any of the other myriad of combat options that would negate your "meat shield".
LilithsThrall wrote:
On the other hand, it's really easy for me to get a pretty hefty meat shield (rather than the comparative paper mache that Monster Summoning offers). Sucks to be you.
If I wanted a meat shield I could have one just as easily as you. I have every spell you would use to get one. I just don't use tactics like that. Unlike you I don't have to hide behind somebody else.
LilithsThrall wrote:
Since it'll cost you 17,500 gp per every other encounter or so, I'll let you have that advantage in action economy. It's not very cost effective.
Your DM casts Greater Dispel Magic against your party, every other encounter? Now I think your just making stuff up.
LilithsThrall wrote:
As for action economy, if we don't even factor in all the stuff I can do before combat even starts (due to Prying Eyes), in the first round of combat, I've got a disintegrate or baleful polymorph, my own spell (which could be a dispel magic), and whatever my bound creature is doing. In comparison, you've got a "See Invisibility", a Scorching Ray, and whatever spell you cast - and it costs you a lot of gold.
I think I win that contest.
I don't in fact I think you loose about 1/3 of the time. First off your assuming you have a bound creature and I don't, which really isn't a valid assumption, but I'll go with it.
Any confrontation between high level casters comes down to initiative. I have a +3 advantage so I win the face off about 65% off the time.
My first turn Power Word Blind on you. Now you are all but useless, and really I just have to deal with your minions. The imp uses the Wand of Enervation on your bound creature, I snap my fingers and the Imp and I are invisible. The only thing that could see us is blind for a d4+1 minutes. Now I can summon monsters and haste them without breaking invisibility while your minions are trying to fight an invisible flying spell caster. If I win initiative your only real option is fleeing while blind- I'd love to hear what the DM's response to the blind spellcaster saying "I D-Door away".
That's probably what I would do because it's certain and I'm counting on the fact that my character doesn't know your character's saves. Because if I used Flesh to Stone instead 95% of the time you're a statue.
If you win initiative my chances are much worse. Your best option is probably the Baleful Polymorph DC 29, because you only hit with disintegration 45% of the time. I'm a toad 95% of the time if you pick right. And that assumes the DM won't let me use the Contingency spell as a swift action even though I lost initiative, if he does you auto loose.
LilithsThrall wrote:
I've got a staff of transmutation and the UMD to have my familiar use it. While you're piddling with scorching ray, I've got a staff that let's my familiar do disintegrate and it's fairly easy for me to recharge it. (I'm going to go ahead and switch my familiar to an Imp - thanks for pointing that out.)
I suppose technically your familiar could use a staff but the idea of Tiny creature using a 5 foot piece of wood to target something is pretty ridiculous.
LilithsThrall wrote:
I can bind a Cuoatl. That gives me access to a substantial number of cleric spells. Sucks to be you. And it doesn't cost me an action during combat to do it.
I can bind one too. I know my score isn't as monstrous as yours but a +9 advantage should be more than enough to bind one. And you can't summon monsters- advantage Bubba.
LilithsThrall wrote:
What I've said is, "Sense Motive, also, would be nice. I did admit early on in this discussion that lack of skill points is the Sorcerer's fundamental weakness.
Really I think you have become overly enamored with big bonuses. You don't need to invest anymore in Intimidate, Bluff or UMD and probably should have stopped investing in them 3 levels ago. They already do everything you need them to. What you should do is start investing skill points in the skills you don't have. If you put 1 skill point in Diplomacy your +10 bonus means you get could Take 10 and still hit a DC 20 Gather Info check. Just an observation.
Demigorgon 8 My Baby wrote: Example a hostile NPC with a +3 Cha bonus has a DC of 28. I can Take 10 No, you can't.
Demigorgon 8 My Baby wrote:
Every monster remotely near your CR auto hits you with everything, how the hell did you survive to 13th Level.
If they ever got the opportunity, yes. But they don't. The meat shield stops melee. Other things stop other attacks.
Demigorgon 8 My Baby wrote:
If I wanted a meat shield I could have one just as easily as you.
No, you couldn't. I have a far easier time making the contested charisma roll than you do.
Demigorgon 8 My Baby wrote:
If you win initiative my chances are much worse. Your best option is probably the Baleful Polymorph DC 29, because you only hit with disintegration 45% of the time. I'm a toad 95% of the time if you pick right.
Considering my bound creature will typically have a much higher initiative than you will and that I've got Prying Eyes up (so, probably saw you long before you even knew I was near), I'm probably going to act first. That means, as you said, you're highly likely to die.
Demigorgon 8 My Baby wrote:
I suppose technically your familiar could use a staff but the idea of Tiny creature using a 5 foot piece of wood to target something is pretty ridiculous.
Nowhere in the book does it say that you have to wave a staff around in order to use it.
Demigorgon 8 My Baby wrote:
I can bind one too. I know my score isn't as monstrous as yours but a +9 advantage should be more than enough to bind one. And you can't summon monsters- advantage Bubba.
You can occasionally manage to survive an attempt at binding. I can regularly bind creatures. Again, this means that I'll have a bound creature nearby constantly - advantage Sorcerer.
LilithsThrall wrote: Prying eyes IIRC, prying eyes has a low stealth, but a high perception. If the wizard has a high perception he may see the eyes first. Of course who would win in a PVP match does not matter. It does matter who is more useful in a particular campaign.
edit:fixed formatting.
Uh. Lilith's Thrall, I hate to break it to you, but a Ring of Sustenance does NOT shrink the time required to rest and get back spell energy. All it removes is the need for sleep. Just like elves, you still have to have 8 hours of rest...you're just awake while resting (probably reading a book, playing with cantrips, or practicinig come-on lines).
I'm suprised you didn't know that. I thought they specifically addressed it in the Ring description, because that was an issue in 3.5 for a LONG time.
==Aelryinth
Aelryinth wrote: Uh. Lilith's Thrall, I hate to break it to you, but a Ring of Sustenance does NOT shrink the time required to rest and get back spell energy. All it removes is the need for sleep. Just like elves, you still have to have 8 hours of rest...you're just awake while resting (probably reading a book, playing with cantrips, or practicinig come-on lines).
I'm suprised you didn't know that. I thought they specifically addressed it in the Ring description, because that was an issue in 3.5 for a LONG time.
==Aelryinth
You're wrong. Read the core book page 483
wraithstrike wrote:
IIRC, prying eyes has a low stealth, but a high perception. If the wizard has a high perception he may see the eyes first. Of course who would win in a PVP match does not matter. It does matter who is more useful in a particular campaign.
I agree. And I think that the extra skills, and more powerful spells that a Wizard has are more of an advantage to the party than the magical versatility of the Sorcerer.
Here is my conclusion. The Wizard is slightly more powerful than the Sorcerer. So give the Sorcerer a bonus feat at 1st Level to help even things out a little. If you want to make it fair give the Wizard Eschew Materials for free- in 20+ years of playing D&D I have never had a DM attack, steal or even mention material components for any spell that didn't have a GP cost. And as a DM I never use them.
ah, that's right, they did up date it for pathfinder. Apologies. But kindly note you shouldn't use a cheap magic item as a defense for a class ability. A wizard could pick up the feat and use the extra 6 hours for item creation he grabbed with his extra class feat, for example.
Aelryinth wrote: ah, that's right, they did up date it for pathfinder. Apologies. But kindly note you shouldn't use a cheap magic item as a defense for a class ability. A wizard could pick up the feat and use the extra 6 hours for item creation he grabbed with his extra class feat, for example. Nope, it takes at least a day to create a scroll which has 1 spell (more if the spell is over 4th level).
Even if the wizard talked the rest of the party into resting for an extra two hours each day (no, wait, they'd need to wait an extra three hours each day as it takes a Wizard an hour every day to prepare their spells), between getting a bound creature and paying gold to get a 4th level spell, getting a bound creature is significantly better.
I forgot to include all the skills from the planer bound creatures and charmed people.
The Couatl, alone, provides Diplomacy +18, Sense Motive +18, Perception +23, etc.
LilithsThrall wrote:
I'm not aware of the WBL limitation on single item costs. Please point it out (page and quote) and I'll modify my build. My character is an actual character played in a real game (not just a theoretical exercise like yours where you bought a number of stat bonuses that give odd bonuses in order to optimize for this one level). So, I want the character to be legal.
pg. 400 PFRPG 3rd paragraph
"Characters should spend no more than half their wealth on any single item."
But it really doesn't matter if your DM says it's cool who cares.
As for the stat bonus items, that is one of the beautiful things about Craft Wondrous Item. You can upgrade them as you need to for optimization. So if you have a stat that say a 16 and a +2 item and you get a stat increase, you add 1 to your stat and then upgrade the item to +3 so you get the extra +1 stat bonus right there and then. And it would only cost you 5000GP.
BTW what level did the character start out at.
"Note that a clever recipient can subvert some instructions."
So while you're out making yourself the most hated being in all the planes, you're forcing some very intelligent beings to be your diplomats. Is that really such a good idea?
I think your DM is being absurdly generous with the effects of planar binding.
Demigorgon 8 My Baby wrote: LilithsThrall wrote:
I'm not aware of the WBL limitation on single item costs. Please point it out (page and quote) and I'll modify my build. My character is an actual character played in a real game (not just a theoretical exercise like yours where you bought a number of stat bonuses that give odd bonuses in order to optimize for this one level). So, I want the character to be legal.
pg. 400 PFRPG 3rd paragraph
"Characters should spend no more than half their wealth on any single item."
But it really doesn't matter if your DM says it's cool who cares.
As for the stat bonus items, that is one of the beautiful things about Craft Wondrous Item. You can upgrade them as you need to for optimization. So if you have a stat that say a 16 and a +2 item and you get a stat increase, you add 1 to your stat and then upgrade the item to +3 so you get the extra +1 stat bonus right there and then. And it would only cost you 5000GP.
BTW what level did the character start out at.
Thank you, I wasn't aware of these rules. The GM has, of course, okayed the character, but I like to stick to the rules and guidelines anyway. I'm going to talk to him about making the change.
Umbral Reaver wrote: "Note that a clever recipient can subvert some instructions."
So while you're out making yourself the most hated being in all the planes, you're forcing some very intelligent beings to be your diplomats. Is that really such a good idea?
I think your DM is being absurdly generous with the effects of planar binding.
.
..
...
....
.....
Not to mention his Sorcerer seems to have an interesting ability to find and bind very stupid Couatls....
O_o
The Couatl is a creature that requires the use of constant Dimensional Anchor to prevent is from Plane Shifting. While it can only make one such attempt per day, it can easily choose when best to do so.
Planar Binding wrote: The target creature is allowed a Will saving throw. If the saving throw succeeds, the creature resists the spell. If the saving throw fails, the creature is immediately drawn to the trap (spell resistance does not keep it from being called). The creature can escape from the trap by successfully pitting its spell resistance against your caster level check, by dimensional travel, or with a successful Charisma check (DC 15 + 1/2 your caster level + your Charisma modifier). It can try each method once per day. Couatl's have Detect Thoughts (at will)
Couatl's have Plane Shift (at will)
Dimensional Anchor only lasts 1 minute/leve
Dimensional Anchor is a 4th level spell
So, unless LilithsThrall's Sorcerer is burning 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th level slots to cast Dimensional Anchor over and over again I can't see how it's remaing bound..
Is your DM is playing a Couatl that attempts to Plane Shift at he same time each day, every time.
Very strange..
Story time:
LilithsThrall: How is your Sorcerer maintaineing Dimensional Anchor on his Couatl?
::
Strangely, your DM doesn't seem to enforce any consequences of your Sorcerer's continued angering of powerful planar entities, many of which capable of Plane Shifting and who's friends/allies are also capable of Plane Shifting.
::
Once again..
...most if not all of your assumptions and assertions are based on idealised scenarios at best and DM bending the rules in your favour at worst.
Do you have anything to contribute regarding the Sorcerer class's advantages when compared to the Wizard class?..
..contributions that are not based on DM's favouring the class?
So far we're seen, not from you mind, a good point raised regarding the power of repetitive spell combinations.
This is an example of an *actual* advantage that isn't based on examples drawn from someones personal homebrew campaign that seems setup to favour a particular character.
*shakes fist*
BenignFacist wrote: Umbral Reaver wrote: "Note that a clever recipient can subvert some instructions."
So while you're out making yourself the most hated being in all the planes, you're forcing some very intelligent beings to be your diplomats. Is that really such a good idea?
I think your DM is being absurdly generous with the effects of planar binding.
I'm curious what is being offered in return for the service of the creature being bound. If there is no payment for service being offered Planar Binding is risky.
I would think that being commanded to be a meatshield with nothing offered in return would be an unreasonable command, which the spell description says are never accepted.
Even if you did convice the creature to agree to the bargain it would be considered an open ended command and the creature would be free in 13 days. So you'd have to summon once every fortnight.
During the days that you are trying to convince the creature to be your slave for nothing in return it get's its SR against caster level and a charisma check to try to get free. It also has a 5% of automatically getting free when you make your daily proposal.
If at anytime a hair were to fall across the circle or a small critter disturbed the drawing there would be a free and irrate extraplanar creature free in your sanctum. An extraplanar creature with lots of extrplanar friends that are bound to resent the hubris of a mortal that dares to enslave them.
If your enemies knew that you were in the middle of negociations with your next perspective thrall I'd imagine that would be a fine time to attack. I'd also imagine that if they disturbed the circle they'd find themselves with an ally.
Keeping the critter from bampfing away shouldn't be that hard. If the caster takes the time to make a diagram (with DC 20 spellcraft check) it will deny the creature the ability to use SR to break out of the circle. It will also let a Dimensional Anchor cast on the circle last for 1 day per caster level.
Absolutely unrelated and even further off topic: I'm not really sure how Banishment or Dismissal would work on a bound creature that was less than enthusiastic about the arrangement. It might not even bother to save against the spell.
LilithsThrall wrote: Aelryinth wrote: ah, that's right, they did up date it for pathfinder. Apologies. But kindly note you shouldn't use a cheap magic item as a defense for a class ability. A wizard could pick up the feat and use the extra 6 hours for item creation he grabbed with his extra class feat, for example. Nope, it takes at least a day to create a scroll which has 1 spell (more if the spell is over 4th level).
Even if the wizard talked the rest of the party into resting for an extra two hours each day (no, wait, they'd need to wait an extra three hours each day as it takes a Wizard an hour every day to prepare their spells), between getting a bound creature and paying gold to get a 4th level spell, getting a bound creature is significantly better. No you can make a scroll with a cost of 250g or less in 2 hours. I personally have never played in a game where 22 hours out of the day is taken up by adventuring, usually more like 6-8, rest meals downtime, etc taking up the remainder. It is very easy to find a couple hours of downtime in a day. It means at best 2nd level spells on a scroll, but low level spells still provide great utility to later levels.
I do think your DM is extremely liberal with planar bindings btw. I've never had it where they were a permanent pet. At best I get them to do one task for me ("Finish this dungeon").
Dreamslinger wrote: Keeping the critter from bampfing away shouldn't be that hard. If the caster takes the time to make a diagram (with DC 20 spellcraft check) it will deny the creature the ability to use SR to break out of the circle. It will also let a Dimensional Anchor cast on the circle last for 1 day per caster level. A good point.
However this tactic limits the mobility of the Sorcerer.
Initially, and consistently, LilthsThrall has offered that having a pre-bound monster was an advantage possessed by his Sorcerer over Demigorgon 8 My Baby's Wizard, who is able to cast multiple Summon Monster spells in combat..
..now personally, I'd see not being able to move the bound creature without having to maintain Dimensional Anchor - at the cost of 4th level or higher spell slots - to be a disadvantage.
Granted, this is not unique to the Sorcerer class but rather a constraint of the spell itself. It is also interesting to note that, if any class was to rely on repeated castings of Dimensional Anchor, the Sorcerer would be one of the best, if not *the* best, class at employing such a tactic.
Dreamslinger wrote: Absolutely unrelated and even further off topic: I'm not really sure how Banishment or Dismissal would work on a bound creature that was less than enthusiastic about the arrangement. It might not even bother to save against the spell. Another good point.
The thing to realise here, and the main point I wish to express - a point that your two good points have helped support - is that LilthThrall's DM seems to be incredibly lenient regarding several of the key tactics used by LilithThrall's Sorcerer...
..which seemingly has resulted in him attributing DM leniency and a campaign style that favours his character to actual advantages of the class.
::
Now, I'm all for sharing stories but when comparing two classes it is important to critically evaluate your play experiences and to be aware of DM bias.
*shakes fist*
BenignFacist wrote: Umbral Reaver wrote: "Note that a clever recipient can subvert some instructions."
So while you're out making yourself the most hated being in all the planes, you're forcing some very intelligent beings to be your diplomats. Is that really such a good idea?
I think your DM is being absurdly generous with the effects of planar binding.
.
..
...
....
.....
Not to mention his Sorcerer seems to have an interesting ability to find and bind very stupid Couatls....
O_o
The Couatl is a creature that requires the use of constant Dimensional Anchor to prevent is from Plane Shifting. While it can only make one such attempt per day, it can easily choose when best to do so.
Planar Binding wrote: The target creature is allowed a Will saving throw. If the saving throw succeeds, the creature resists the spell. If the saving throw fails, the creature is immediately drawn to the trap (spell resistance does not keep it from being called). The creature can escape from the trap by successfully pitting its spell resistance against your caster level check, by dimensional travel, or with a successful Charisma check (DC 15 + 1/2 your caster level + your Charisma modifier). It can try each method once per day. Couatl's have Detect Thoughts (at will)
Couatl's have Plane Shift (at will)
Dimensional Anchor only lasts 1 minute/leve
Dimensional Anchor is a 4th level spell
So, unless LilithsThrall's Sorcerer is burning 4th, 5th, 6th and 7th level slots to cast Dimensional Anchor over and over again I can't see how it's remaing bound..
Is your DM is playing a Couatl that attempts to Plane Shift at he same time each day, every time.
Very strange..
Story time:** spoiler omitted **... Read the Core Book page 308.
"A successful diagram allows you to cast a dimensional anchor spell on the magic circle during the round before casting any summoning spell. The anchor holds any called creatures in the magic circle for 24 hours per caster level."
As per spending the kind of gp I did on the staff, I broke a guideline, not a rule. The character build is legal.
BenignFacist wrote: Dreamslinger wrote: Keeping the critter from bampfing away shouldn't be that hard. If the caster takes the time to make a diagram (with DC 20 spellcraft check) it will deny the creature the ability to use SR to break out of the circle. It will also let a Dimensional Anchor cast on the circle last for 1 day per caster level. A good point.
However this tactic limits the mobility of the Sorcerer.
Initially, and consistently, LilthsThrall has offered that having a pre-bound monster was an advantage possessed by his Sorcerer over Demigorgon 8 My Baby's Wizard, who is able to cast multiple Summon Monster spells in combat..
..now personally, I'd see not being able to move the bound creature without having to maintain Dimensional Anchor - at the cost of 4th level or higher spell slots - to be a disadvantage.
Granted, this is not unique to the Sorcerer class but rather a constraint of the spell itself. It is also interesting to note that, if any class was to rely on repeated castings of Dimensional Anchor, the Sorcerer would be one of the best, if not *the* best, class at employing such a tactic.
Dreamslinger wrote: Absolutely unrelated and even further off topic: I'm not really sure how Banishment or Dismissal would work on a bound creature that was less than enthusiastic about the arrangement. It might not even bother to save against the spell. Another good point.
The thing to realise here, and the main point I wish to express - a point that your two good points have helped support - is that LilthThrall's DM seems to be incredibly lenient regarding several of the key tactics used by LilithThrall's Sorcerer...
..which seemingly has resulted in him attributing DM leniency and a campaign style that favours his character to actual advantages of the class.
::
Now, I'm all for sharing stories but when comparing two classes it is important to critically evaluate your play experiences and to be aware of DM bias.
*shakes fist* Again, wrong.
Once the creature agrees to the terms presented in the Planer Binding spell, I don't care if it can plane shift. It still has to act according to the agreement reached in the Planer Binding spell.
meatrace wrote: No you can make a scroll with a cost of 250g or less in 2 hours. I personally have never played in a game where 22 hours out of the day is taken up by adventuring, usually more like 6-8, rest meals downtime, etc taking up the remainder. It is very easy to find a couple hours of downtime in a day. It means at best 2nd level spells on a scroll, but low level spells still provide great utility to later levels. That's a second level spell. And you can only do it if you have a fairly quiet, comfortable, and well-lit place in which to work. The side of the road during adventuring isn't comfortable. So, you'd have to teleport home each night.
meatrace wrote:
I do think your DM is extremely liberal with planar bindings btw. I've never had it where they were a permanent pet. At best I get them to do one task for me ("Finish this dungeon").
Nobody said "permanent". All that's ever been said is that the spell could have been cast a week before the combat. The spell itself, says, "If you assign some open-ended task that the creature cannot complete through it's own actions, the spell remains in effect for a maximum of 1 day per caster level". So, if you consider sticking to the spell description to be "extremely liberal", I don't know how to respond.
Dreamslinger wrote: I'm curious what is being offered in return for the service of the creature being bound. If there is no payment for service being offered Planar Binding is risky. No, Planer Binding is always risky. Offering something in return doesn't change that. My Sorcerer makes it a point not to summon anything that has the ability to track him down and he keeps nondetection up all the time. The risks are minimal. Still, my Sorcerer knows the risks he's taking.
Dreamslinger wrote:
I would think that being commanded to be a meatshield with nothing offered in return would be an unreasonable command,
I think you misunderstood. Meat shields are typically charmed monsters or the like. The occasional Tanker is summoned, but only from such creatures whose creature type enjoys fighting.
Dreamslinger wrote:
Even if you did convice the creature to agree to the bargain it would be considered an open ended command and the creature would be free in 13 days. So you'd have to summon once every fortnight.
Yes, that's true. Fortunately, the Sorcerer has a +17 on his opposed charisma roll.
Dreamslinger wrote:
During the days that you are trying to convince the creature to be your slave for nothing in return it get's its SR against caster level and a charisma check to try to get free. It also has a 5% of automatically getting free when you make your daily proposal.
It only takes days if the charisma check doesn't succeed right away. Mine almost always will (due to that +17 I mentioned earlier). My Sorcerer makes it a point to use only the Deluxe version of the Magic Circle Binding Circle, so SR isn't relevant.
.
..
...
....
.....
Planar Binding wrote: If the creature does not break free of the trap, you can keep it bound for as long as you dare. You can attempt to compel the creature to perform a service by describing the service and perhaps offering some sort of reward. You make a Charisma check opposed by the creature's Charisma check. The check is assigned a bonus of +0 to +6 based on the nature of the service and the reward. If the creature wins the opposed check, it refuses service. New offers, bribes, and the like can be made or the old ones re-offered every 24 hours. This process can be repeated until the creature promises to serve, until it breaks free, or until you decide to get rid of it by means of some other spell. My reading is:
- The creature can be repeatedly forced to promise to serve.
- Promising to serve does not prevent it from attempting to escape each day.
- While bound and under a promise it must continue to keep it's promise.
::
One more time:
Regardles, I'm all for sharing stories but when comparing two classes it is important to critically evaluate your play experiences and to be aware of DM bias.
Some examples:
The manner in which your game handles social interactions, regarding Bluff, Diplomacy and Sense Motive especially.
The lenient manner in which your DM handles Planar Binding - no consequences from intelligent creatures, many with friends, many with the ability to Plane Shift right back and attack you after their promise is complete.
Your treatment of the Leadership feat.
The generous regarding of your characters mental attributes regarding planning and actions.
Your Socrerer comes from an idealised campaign with a lenient DM.
*shakes fist*
BenignFacist wrote: .
..
...
....
.....
Planar Binding wrote: If the creature does not break free of the trap, you can keep it bound for as long as you dare. You can attempt to compel the creature to perform a service by describing the service and perhaps offering some sort of reward. You make a Charisma check opposed by the creature's Charisma check. The check is assigned a bonus of +0 to +6 based on the nature of the service and the reward. If the creature wins the opposed check, it refuses service. New offers, bribes, and the like can be made or the old ones re-offered every 24 hours. This process can be repeated until the creature promises to serve, until it breaks free, or until you decide to get rid of it by means of some other spell. My reading is:
- The creature can be repeatedly forced to promise to serve.
- Promising to serve to not prevent it from attempting to escape each day.
::
Regardles, I'm all for sharing stories but when comparing two classes it is important to critically evaluate your play experiences and to be aware of DM bias.
*shakes fist*
You may want to look up the definition of the word "compel" as in "You can attempt to compel the creature to perform a service by describing the service and perhaps offering some sort of reward."
LilithsThrall wrote:
*shakes fist* [/QUOTE
You may want to look up the definition of the word "compel" as in "You can attempt to compel the creature to perform a service by describing the service and perhaps offering some sort of reward."
- The creature can be repeatedly forced to promise to serve.
- Promising to serve does not prevent it from attempting to escape each day.
- While bound and under a promise it must continue to keep it's promise.
The spell does not say or imply in anyway that once a creature is forced to perform a task it is prevented from attempting to escape each day.
My understanding is:
You can be forced to go to work - it doesn't mean you can't try to run.
I'm not reading anything that conflicts with this logic.
*shakes fist*
BenignFacist wrote: LilithsThrall wrote:
*shakes fist* [/QUOTE
You may want to look up the definition of the word "compel" as in "You can attempt to compel the creature to perform a service by describing the service and perhaps offering some sort of reward."
- The creature can be repeatedly forced to promise to serve.
- Promising to serve does not prevent it from attempting to escape each day.
- While bound and under a promise it must continue to keep it's promise.
The spell does not say or imply in anyway that once a creature is forced to perform a task it is prevented from attempting to escape each day.
My understanding is:
You can be forced to go to work - it doesn't mean you can't try to run.
I'm not reading anything that conflicts with this logic.
*shakes fist* The spell does not say "You can attempt to compel the creature to promise to perform an action". The spell says, "You can attempt to compel the creature to perform an action." Your understanding of the spell is simply wrong.
LilithsThrall wrote:
The spell does not say "You can attempt to compel the creature to promise to perform an action". The spell says, "You can attempt to compel the creature to perform an action." Your understanding of the spell is simply wrong. ..so if it's forced to do something it can't try to escape?
Ok, I'll go with that - it's a risky enough spell as it is.
LilithsThrall wrote:
I'm still waiting for you to explain why you think knowledge skills, diplomacy, and sense motive are necessary for a master of misinformation.
...as I said provided an explanation a few pages back.
o_O
This is the second time you've asked me about it..
..and the second time I've told you I've already replied.
::
The rest of your post, once again, show that your basing your assertions on your campaign..
..one that presents and idealised scenario that favours your Sorcerer.
So, yes, within your campaign your Sorcerer has many advantages over a Wizard.
Unfortunately, most of us don't play Sorcerers in your campaign.
*shakes fist*
LilithsThrall wrote: meatrace wrote: No you can make a scroll with a cost of 250g or less in 2 hours. I personally have never played in a game where 22 hours out of the day is taken up by adventuring, usually more like 6-8, rest meals downtime, etc taking up the remainder. It is very easy to find a couple hours of downtime in a day. It means at best 2nd level spells on a scroll, but low level spells still provide great utility to later levels. That's a second level spell. And you can only do it if you have a fairly quiet, comfortable, and well-lit place in which to work. The side of the road during adventuring isn't comfortable. So, you'd have to teleport home each night. "Fairly" doesn't mean absolutely. Of course this depends on the DM, but when I DM, i find it enough that our wizard has his sitting pillow, is in a place without unusually loud sounds (about the sound level of a calm restaurant or a library IRL is okay, so a dungeon would most of the time work unless monsters or running water or the like interfere), and a few candles is enough for the lightning (or simply casting the light spell).
LT, while your posts DO raise interesting ways to play a sorcerer, and I really want to play a manipulator when I read them, I agree with the others that you seem to apply an amount of circumstantial positive modifiers for the sorcerer, that aren't unfair or unrealistic but certainly worth noting as being circumstantial (having a bound planar adjacent at all times, being able to charm a meat shield).
At the same time, you seem to try to make it as hard as you can for the wizard, downplaying the strengths it has and interpreting it's drawbacks far too harschly (as the example I quoted; no way "fairly comfortable" means you have to teleport home).
I don't think your DM is TOO soft with the planar bindings if you mostly summon good creatures for good deeds and treat them fairly. If you use them as slaves or servants though, or for morally gray deeds, I think the DM are a bit too lenient. While you do have non-detection, that only helps to a small degree; much like you yourself do, most powerful outsiders have high charisma and belong to groups which will help them out (if good) or want revenge (if LE) or just take the chance to hurt people (if NE/CE). You may use bluffs and deceptions to set up a pretty strong defense against such things, but they won't help against everyone all the time since you'll have to summon a lot of different outsiders. If you summon the same couatl over and over, you're going to have problems, as it's friends will detect where the couatl is and come kick you're a$$.
I think what you're doing is possible to pull off, as long as you keep it reasonable and are decent to the outsiders. But it isn't very easy, and requires a quite specific build. If sorcerers are dependant on constant planar allies to get to the same power level as wizards, that pigeonholes them. I can't see an evil sorcerer doing this unless binding very weak and unimportant outsiders, as both good and evil outsiders will be pretty pissed and sooner or later take him out.
I'm not saying the sorcerer is bad or that you're "cheating", I'm just saying that you seem to assume a lot of uncertain boons for the sorcerer, and at the same time denying the wizard even the most basic of almost-certain boons (such as being able to write scrolls without having to teleport home). This leads to you coming across as aggressive, which in no way helps the discussion even if it may very well be that you don't mean to, or maybe aren't even aware of it. It's an interesting debate which I'm certain several people like me read without commenting much, and it's sad if it dies due to (perceived) obnoxiousness.
BenignFacist wrote: ...as I said provided an explanation a few pages back.
o_O
This is the second time you've asked me about it..
..and the second time I've told you I've already replied.
I scrolled back. I didn't see it. I doubt you posted it.
BenignFacist wrote:
The rest of your post, once again, show that your basing your assertions on your campaign..
..one that presents and idealised scenario that favours your Sorcerer.
So, yes, within your campaign your Sorcerer has many advantages over a Wizard.
Unfortunately, most of us don't play Sorcerers in your campaign.
I've shown that everything I've done is by the rules of the game. The only thing I've been called on is the guideline for spending half of WBL on one item. On the other hand, on multiple occasions, I've had to point to the PRD or give a page reference in the core book to point out where you all have been wrong about the rules.
If you think sticking to the rules makes my experiences "campaign specific", I can see why you feel the way you do about sorcerers.
stringburka wrote: LilithsThrall wrote: meatrace wrote: No you can make a scroll with a cost of 250g or less in 2 hours. I personally have never played in a game where 22 hours out of the day is taken up by adventuring, usually more like 6-8, rest meals downtime, etc taking up the remainder. It is very easy to find a couple hours of downtime in a day. It means at best 2nd level spells on a scroll, but low level spells still provide great utility to later levels. That's a second level spell. And you can only do it if you have a fairly quiet, comfortable, and well-lit place in which to work. The side of the road during adventuring isn't comfortable. So, you'd have to teleport home each night. "Fairly" doesn't mean absolutely. Of course this depends on the DM, but when I DM, i find it enough that our wizard has his sitting pillow, is in a place without unusually loud sounds (about the sound level of a calm restaurant or a library IRL is okay, so a dungeon would most of the time work unless monsters or running water or the like interfere), and a few candles is enough for the lightning (or simply casting the light spell).
LT, while your posts DO raise interesting ways to play a sorcerer, and I really want to play a manipulator when I read them, I agree with the others that you seem to apply an amount of circumstantial positive modifiers for the sorcerer, that aren't unfair or unrealistic but certainly worth noting as being circumstantial (having a bound planar adjacent at all times, being able to charm a meat shield).
At the same time, you seem to try to make it as hard as you can for the wizard, downplaying the strengths it has and interpreting it's drawbacks far too harschly (as the example I quoted; no way "fairly comfortable" means you have to teleport home).
I don't think your DM is TOO soft with the planar bindings if you mostly summon good creatures for good deeds and treat them fairly. If you use them as slaves or servants though, or for morally gray deeds, I think the DM are a bit too... As I said before, if I had to choose between spending a night to get a 4th level spell scroll (at the cost of gold) or spending a night to get a bound creature who can cast multiple spells, I think the bound creature is the better choice.
Since I said that, people reduced the comparison to 2nd level spells, not 4th. So, I still think the bound creature is the better choice.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LilithsThrall wrote:
The Sorcerer can bind the Cuoatl a week before the combat. In fact, this Sorcerer has a ring of sustenance so that he can do that binding while the rest of the party sleeps.
The sorcerer may be able to stay up a week with that ring, he's not going to get any slots refreshed in the meantime though.
Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
LilithsThrall wrote: Like I said, this is an advantage for the Sorcerer as he can have his cohort make the magic items and doesn't have to worry about the spell book's impact on WBL. Wrong... Cohorts come with barely anything beyond the clothes on their backs. That's why they are cohorts and not adventurers in their own right. Their equipment (which includes filling out their spellbook) comes out of YOUR WBL.
.
..
...
....
.....
LilithsThrall wrote:
I scrolled back. I didn't see it. I doubt you posted it.
It's there to be read if you're willing to read. Page 9.
I'm assuming you read people's posts properly before replying..
::
Let's try and be constructive:
For the sake of attempting to help a reader of this post weigh up the pros and cons of both the Wizard and Sorcerer class, let's make a list of what we believe to be advantages and disadvantages of the class.
We can keep it simple and neat then pick out the points we wish to discuss.
Where applicable we can warn of advantages/disadvantages that are:
- mechanically dependent
- character dependent
- DM/campaign dependent
- build dependent
Note: The idea is to make a list, add to the list, tweak the list and ultimately provide a reference that is 'clean'.
If you are not aware of the concept of Clean Language, here is a brief summary:
Quote: Clean Language. Clean Language questions are designed to reduce to a minimum any influence from the facilitator's 'map of the world' via his/her metaphors, interpretations or unwarranted assumptions. ::
So, by no means an exhaustive or definitive list:
Mechanical: Dependent on the mechanics of the class.
Roleplay: Dependent on your roleplaying style/character concept.
DM Dependant: Dependent on your DM/Campain.
Build Dependant: Dependent on the build of the character.
Key:
(M)Mechanical (Rp)Roleplay (Dm)DM Dependant (Bd)Build Dependant
The List
Wizard
+ Greater number of spells known. (M)
+ Ability to customise spell list each day. (M)
+ More skill points. (M)(Bd)
+ Prime stat favours complex strategic planning. (Rp)
+ Earlier spell access. (M)
- Less spells per day. (M)
- Less socially adapt. (Rp)(Bd)
- Lower Leadership Score (M)
- Highly dependent on player's ability to plan ahead. (M)(Bd)
::
Sorcerer
+ Greater number of spells per day. (M)
+ Repetitive Spell Combinations (M)
+ Greater independence (M)
+ Better Use Magic Device (M)(Bd)
- Static spell list
- Less skill points
- Later spell level access
- Slower metamagic spell casting
::
So, what do you think? Anything to add? Change? Clarify?
*shakes fist*
|
